Moldauer v Constellation Brands Inc - [2013] SASC 38

Supreme Court of South Australia
(Appeal from a Master)
MOLDAUER v CONSTELLATION BRANDS INC
[2013] SASC 38
Judgment of The Honourable Chief Justice Kourakis (ex tempore)
22 February 2013
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - SOUTH AUSTRALIA - STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - RESTRAINT OF PROCEEDINGS - OF LOCAL PROCEEDINGS: CLEARLY INAPPROPRIATE FORUM - GENERALLY
The appellant appeals against an order permanently staying the action brought by him in this Court against the respondent. The action was stayed by a Master of this Court on the ground that this Court was a clearly inappropriate forum. The appellant was employed by, and worked for the respondent in California, USA. The appellant claims damages for non payment of wages, under what he claims is an extant contract of employment with the respondent. The respondent contends that the appellant’s employment was terminated in accordance with terms recorded in an agreement referred to as ‘the severance agreement’. The respondent is a foreign company registered under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). It has significant shareholdings in other companies in Australia, but it does not conduct business in this country. On appeal, the matter for determination is whether this Court is a clearly inappropriate forum for the determination of the dispute.
Held: appeal dismissed – this Court is a clearly inappropriate forum having regard to the legal issues to be determined, the location of witnesses and the costs of litigating the matter in Australia.
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), referred to.
Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1991) 171 CLR 538; Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd [1987] AC 460; McGregor v Potts (2005) 68 NSWLR 109; Garsec v His Majesty The Sultan of Brunei & Anor (2007) 213 FLR 331; Compagnie des Messageries Maritimes v Wilson (1954) 94 CLR 577; FAI General Insurance Co Ltd v Ocean Marine Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association & Anor (1997) 41 NSWLR 117, considered.

MOLDAUER v CONSTELLATION BRANDS INC
[2013] SASC 38
Appeal from a Master

KOURAKIS CJ (ex tempore): The appellant, Mr Moldauer, appeals against an order permanently staying the action brought by him in this Court on 4 April 2012 against the respondent, Constellation Brands, Inc (CBI). The action was stayed by a Master of this Court on the ground that this Court is a plainly inappropriate forum.
Mr Moldauer claims damages for non payment of wages, under what he claims is an extant contract of employment with CBI. Mr Moldauer was employed by and worked for CBI in California as a senior cost analyst between September 2000 and October 2002. Mr Moldauer pleads that he was not assigned work duties thereafter even though he was ready, willing and able to perform them. Mr Moldauer seeks an award compensating him for his unpaid salary from October 2002 to the date of judgment.
CBI, by its defence, contends that Mr Moldauer’s employment was terminated in accordance with terms recorded in an…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Moldauer v Constellation Brands Inc

Details

AGLC: Moldauer v Constellation Brands Inc [2013] SASC 38
Case: [2013] SASC 38
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Moldauer v Constellation Brands Inc, the Supreme Court of South Australia considered an appeal by Mr Moldauer against an order permanently staying the action he brought against Constellation Brands Inc (CBI). The appellant claimed damages for non-payment of wages under what he alleged to be an extant contract of employment with CBI. CBI contended that the appellant’s employment was terminated in accordance with the terms of a severance agreement. The appeal focused on whether the South Australian court was a clearly inappropriate forum for the determination of the dispute.

The court considered the factors relevant to determining whether the South Australian court was a clearly inappropriate forum, including the location of witnesses, the law governing the relevant transaction, and the costs of litigating the matter in Australia. The court held that the relevant questions would involve a consideration of the law of New York, discovery of documents held in the United States, and testimony from witnesses residing in the United States. The court found that the South Australian court was a clearly inappropriate forum, and dismissed the appeal.

The court also considered the contention by CBI that the severance agreement gave the courts of New York exclusive jurisdiction. The court found that the jurisdiction clause did not provide that all, or any, legal controversies must be submitted to the courts of the State of New York for adjudication. The court was not persuaded by CBI’s alternative contention.

The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal and to uphold the Master's decision that the South Australian court was a clearly inappropriate forum for the determination of the dispute. The Master's costs order remained undisturbed.

Orders